iamshack

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Nov 1, 2016 -> 06:00 PM) Either way collision woulda been on Chisenhall. On the guy camped under the ball? Ok.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Nov 1, 2016 -> 05:59 PM) Meh he was there for the catch anyway. Ok.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Nov 1, 2016 -> 05:58 PM) He slid to avoid collision... No, he was very late getting there.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Nov 1, 2016 -> 05:56 PM) Was his ball all day. He's going to make that sliding catch instead of Chisenhall jogging under it? No.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Nov 1, 2016 -> 05:55 PM) Not to quote J4L, but Naquin is #shook Hah, you just made my evening.

Wtf are you doing out there Naquin?

Bravo! Bravo! Very well done!

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 1, 2016 -> 12:45 PM) Brooks, you took the best only offer? You incompetent idiot, you're fired.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 1, 2016 -> 12:11 PM) The one part about the bolded that bothers me is - if he's going out boating, intoxicated, with cocaine in his system, and he's doing that with a family left behind, then maybe there's some degree of sympathy for him that vanishes because by those bad decisions he left an unborn kid without a father. Making that sort of judgment is not even worth the energy it requires.

QUOTE (Ezio Auditore @ Nov 1, 2016 -> 11:56 AM) It's definitely about numbers. Modern NBA players (especially LeBron) even talk about their own usage and efficiency. The goal isn't so much about getting three-pointers in and of itself, it's about creating better shots with a higher likelihood of converting, and when that look is a three, it's valued more. Kind of like how walks started being valued more when we started using sabermetrics. See that is was sort of my understanding of today's NBA, knowing that a few teams, such as GS, have definitely focused on the value of the 3 in recent years. Getting open shots in and of itself seems to be something the Bulls are doing quite well thus far with this group, and that is why I was a bit thrown by the "retro" comment, which I think ss2k threw out a few days ago as well.

QUOTE (Ezio Auditore @ Nov 1, 2016 -> 11:37 AM) If you watch the 90s Bulls they are the closest thing of the old teams to the way new teams play, it's like they were doing a beta version before everyone else started doing it. Even still, the conventional wisdom was shots closer to the basket were good, and three-point attempts were discouraged due to inefficiency, and long jumpers were something you should avoid doing, these days it's more about creating space with ball movement to spring guys open (the Warriors do this better than anyone except for maybe the Spurs). But you watch the teams that played them, like the Knicks, and man is it slow and plodding. They would try to feed Ewing in the post, then he'd dribble for position, it doesn't work, he kicks back out, they feed him again, they just keep doing this over and over and over... when they were actually creating shots they would pass them up because it's not what they were trying to do. Yeah, that was why the triangle was so successful, because it did require lots of movement away from the ball. Ultimately, it just comes down to mathematics, I guess. How high a percentage can I shoot the 3 by creating open space for these sharpshooters and how many of those looks can I get per game? It seems to me though as if the Spurs haven't necessarily gone crazy shooting 3's and they seem to do quite well in the post season.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 1, 2016 -> 11:23 AM) The game has now evolved into teams being three point shooters with everything else being secondary. The way the Bulls are set up with penetration and mid game range being the primary modes of scoring, which is much more like the 90's style of NBA basketball. The Bulls are totally set up around the guard positions, with no real outside shooting to speak of. It is a very Jordan era type team. Ok, this is what I figured you meant, however, they still do have all the ball movement, which you mentioned. The ball movement is not quite what I would say is the "type" of basketball that was played in the Jordan era. Perhaps a bit with the triangle offense but still a lot more isolation. Have 3-pointers become such a huge part of the sport now that if you aren't chucking a ton of those that the style of play you are engaged in is already referred to as "retro" or "old school"? I didn't realize we had moved on so quickly!

I've not been watching a lot of NBA basketball in the last few years, but I am confused by what you mean when you say "retro-style" basketball. Can you elaborate?

QUOTE (JenksIsMyHero @ Nov 1, 2016 -> 09:34 AM) Has anyone followed his first few games in NY? Is he sitting out for general soreness yet? Dunno, but we play them Friday.

QUOTE (Ezio Auditore @ Nov 1, 2016 -> 08:14 AM) The Bulls look pretty interesting, they way they're winning isn't sustainable (their shot charts are insane), but this is still much more fun to watch than almost any point last year. It's one thing to see how much Rose stalled the offense, it's another to see what it looks like without himwith a capable point guard.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Nov 1, 2016 -> 08:01 AM) The advertisements involved with a franchise still portray an image of the team. Even though the downward logo has to do with mortgage rates, it still gives a negative image when it's plastered next to the team's logo. It's why no team plays at Bob's Dildos Field. Sure, Bob's Dildos may be the best dildo company in the whole world and everybody has nothing but positive things to say about the company, but you still don't want a big dildo plastered all over your stadium walls, no matter how much revenue it brings in. Oh, there WILL be a time!

QUOTE (BrianAnderson @ Nov 1, 2016 -> 07:29 AM) All I can say is that you have 2 heads of companies. Jerry and the Sox and this CEO of Guaranteed Rate and it really goes to prove you really don't have to be that smart to run a company. The fact that 90% of the public can pick up on why this isn't a good look, or how bad of a joke this is should go to prove something to whoever signed off on this decision. Keep the red in the logo, take the arrow out, put a house in. You can keep your down arrow in areas of the stadium by the food, or signage as you walk up the escalators but the main signs, the ones that get shown? those should not have a down arrow. In the end the CEO of Guaranteed RAte, although wrong, isn't really his fault. Him and his marketing people want exposure. They're getting it. He doesn't care about baseball. The real problem is that you had a group of Sox FO ppl who didn't have the foresight to see this problem and took a terrible sponsorhip for 13 year for a few million dollars extra........... dumb is what it is Frankly, this isn't about a sign in the ballpark. This is about a brand being associated with the ballclub. The CEO of GR isn't going to change his logo to accommodate the concerns of the White Sox. As he said, that is the whole point of this deal - to build the brand - not to confuse people as to who the hell they are.

QUOTE (fathom @ Oct 31, 2016 -> 05:46 PM) Gruden criticizing Alshon after a bad pass it looked like to me. Agreed? Looked like the timing was bad...Jay threw it just a bit early.

Not that Mr. Frazier's value hasn't taken a hit as well...

I'm sure we'll all get over it after the first week or so.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Oct 30, 2016 -> 08:49 PM) I knew this would happen. Game 6 momentum? Cubs. Game 6 pitching advantage? Cubs. The beast that is Kyle Schwarber for 4+ PAs? Cubs. Game 7 is a happening. Oh you are a f***ing genius. The whole damn world knew this would happen. f***.

Oh my goodness, they are all so obnoxious. I am happy they had a chance to win a game at home. Now time to end this, Cleveland.

Not a strike, but take the bat off your shoulder Lindor.

Oh Eddie...otherwise you've just got so much going for ya...

Cry Lester.